The film was shot with fixed lenses, almost one shot at a time, using live sound and natural light as much as possible, anticipating that the spirit of the New Wave can also be carried forward on this land. I am always wondering if the film language is similar to what Robert Bolaño described as Mexican poetry, which is “trapped between Octavio Paz and Pablo Neruda, in other words, sandwiched between a rock and a hard stone. ” That is to say, could there be another kind of form in David Griffith’s montage and André Bazin’s long lens? When I put this idea into practice, I found, sadly, that I did not deviate from Godard’s “skipping” technique in essence, but that I differed from his style in concrete terms. What I hope to try is to connect multiple fixed lenses in the same scene to restore the “impossibility” of continuous spatio-temporal experience after the long lens is broken. Is this “impossibility” a kind of falsification that can “truly” show the coherence of spatio-temporal with the long lens that is commonly advocated by us? Or is it just an idealist deception in a materialist context? I tried to use the central idea of Maurice Blanchot’s novel to express the impossibility of love that each of us is a lonely individual above the clamour of the (post-) modern society.